SPE 95575

A Semianalytical Method To Calculate Relative Permeability From Resistivity Well Logs

K. Li, SPE, Stanford U.

Copyright 2005, Society of Petroleum Engineers

against experimental data. The results demonstrated that the
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2005 SPE Annual Technical Conference and relative permeability calculated using the model with
Exhibition held in Dallas, Texas, U.S.A., 9 – 12 October 2005.
resistivity data was close to the experimental data and to those
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
calculated from capillary pressure. A well test can provide the
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to effective permeability of rock around the well bore at initial
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at water saturation. Therefore the absolute permeability of rock
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
may be calculated readily using the relative permeability
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is inferred from the well log and the effective permeability from
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous the well test.
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
One important parameter in geothermal reservoir
engineering is the steam-water relative permeability. Yet it is
Abstract difficult to measure steam-water relative permeability because
A semianalytical model was developed to infer relative of mass transfer and phase transformation as pressure changes.
permeability from resistivity data. Although it would still be Previously, Li and Horne1,2 reported that steam-water relative
necessary to conduct experimental measurements of permeability could be calculated from capillary pressure data.
resistivity, these are easier than measuring capillary pressure. These models provide an easier and more economical
On the other hand, resistivity data are commonly available approach to obtain steam-water relative permeability,
from routine well logging. The semianalytical model was compared to the experimental technique. The disadvantage is
tested against experimental data. The results demonstrated that the need to measure steam-water capillary pressure, which can
the relative permeabilities calculated from resistivity data were also be difficult and time consuming in many cases. It would
close to those calculated from capillary pressure data. The be helpful for engineers and scientists to have a method to
model developed in this study may also provide an approach infer steam-water relative permeability from resistivity data
to estimate permeability using both the resistivity well logging because resistivity is easier to measure in well logging. In this
and well testing. study, a semianalytical model was developed to infer relative
permeability from resistivity data.
Introduction
Relative permeability can be calculated from capillary Mathematical Models
pressure. However this technique still requires measurement The relationship between relative permeability and resistivity
of capillary pressure, which is difficult in many cases (for index is derived in this section. The main theory behind this is
example, if permeability is very low or there is significant the similarity between fluid flow in a porous medium and
mass transfer and phase transformation as pressure changes). electricity flow in a conductive body.
It may be useful to evaluate permeability and relative
permeability from production tests. Routine well tests can Calculation of the Wetting-Phase Relative Permeability
provide only the effective permeability of rock (permeability The conductance of a porous medium at a water saturation of
at initial water saturation). Most of the approaches to 100% is:
evaluating permeability from well logs are based on empirical
relationships between porosity and permeability. On the other Ga = 1 / Ro (1)
hand, it is expensive and difficult in many cases to measure
relative permeability. It would be helpful for engineers and
scientists to have a method to infer permeability and relative where Ro is the resistivity at a water saturation of 100%, Ga is
permeability from resistivity data because they are easier to the conductance of a porous medium at a water saturation of
measure and a great amount of resistivity data is available 100%.
from well logging. However such models have been few. In The conductance of a porous medium at a specific water
this study, a semianalytical model was developed to infer saturation of Sw is:
relative permeability from resistivity data. The basic idea was
the similarity between fluid flow in a porous medium and
Gw = 1 / Rt (2)
electricity flow in a conductive body. The model was tested
2 SPE 95575

where Rt is the resistivity and Gw is the conductance at a Relative permeability of the wetting phase can be calculated
specific water saturation of Sw. using Eq. 6 from resistivity index data once the residual
According to the similarity theory between fluid flow and saturation of the wetting phase is available. Note that the
electrical flow, the relative permeability of the wetting phase residual saturation of the wetting phase can be obtained from
can be calculated using the following equation: the experimental measurement of resistivity.

Calculation of the Nonwetting-phase Relative Permeability

Gw Ro 1
krw = = = According to Li and Horne1, the wetting-phase relative
Ga Rt I
(3) permeability can be calculated using the Purcell approach4 :

where I is the resistivity index, krw is the relative permeability 2+ λ

of the wetting phase. k rw = ( S ) *
w
λ
(8)
According to Archie’s equation3, the following equation
applies:
where λ is the pore size distribution index and can be
Rt calculated from capillary pressure data.
I= = (Sw )−n After the relative permeability curve of the wetting phase
Ro
(4) is obtained using Eq.6, the value of λ can be inferred using Eq.
8.
where n is the Archie’s saturation exponent. According to the Brooks-Corey model5 and the study by Li
At a water saturation of 100%, it is known that I=1, so the and Horne1, the relative permeability of the nonwetting phase
value of krw calculated using Eq. 3 would be equal to 1, which can be calculated once the value of λ is available. The
is true. At the residual water saturation, it is known that krw =0, equation is expressed as follows:
which implies that I approaches infinity according to Eq. 3.
But it is known that the value of I does not approach infinity at 2+λ
the residual water saturation. So the value of krw calculated k rnw = (1 − S w* ) 2 [1 − ( S w* ) λ ]
using Eq. 3 is greater than zero, which is not consistent with (9)
physical observation.
One can also expect that the relative permeability of the One can see that the entire relative permeability set (both
wetting phase calculated using Eq. 3 will be greater than the wetting and nonwetting phases) can be inferred from
true value. The reason is that the resistivity counts the average resistivity index data using Eqs. 6 and 9.
volumetric properties of the pore bodies in a porous medium
while permeability counts the properties of pore throats. This Results
is also why resistivity well logging can obtain porosity but not The experimental data of resistivity and capillary pressure
permeability. measured by Sanyal6 in rocks with different permeability were
Considering these problems, Eq. 3 is modified as follows: used to test the models (Eqs. 6 and 9) developed in this study.
First, the values of relative permeability were calculated using
Eqs. 6 and 9. Second, relative permeability data were
S w − S wr 1
k rw = calculated using capillary pressure data (Li and Horne1).
1 − S wr I According to the study by Li and Horne1, relative permeability
(5)
could be calculated accurately using the capillary pressure
technique. Finally the results of relative permeability inferred
where Swr is the residual saturation of the wetting phase. from resistivity index and capillary pressure data were
According to Eq. 5, krw =1 at Sw =100% and krw =0 at Sw = Swr, compared.
which is reasonable.
Eq. 5 can also be expressed as follows:
Berea Sandstone
The Berea sandstone sample used by Sanyal6 had a porosity of
1 20.4% and a permeability of 300 md. Fig. 1 shows the
k rw = S w* (6)
I relationship between resistivity index and water saturation in
Berea sandstone at a temperature of 175oF.
The values of the resistivity index at different water
S w* is the normalized saturation of the wetting phase and is saturation shown in Fig. 1 were measured in oil-water (water
expressed as follows: displaced by oil) systems. Fig. 1 also shows that the
relationship between resistivity index and water saturation in
Berea sandstone at a temperature of 175oF is linear on a log-
S w − S wr
S w* = log plot, which is consistent with Eq. 4.
1 − S wr
(7)
SPE 95575 3

Oil/water capillary pressure data were measured The resistivity index and capillary pressure data at a
simultaneously with resistivity in the same core sample. The temperature of 300oF are shown in Figs. 13 and 14
results are plotted in Fig. 2. respectively.
Oil/water relative permeability data were calculated from The results of relative permeability calculated from the
resistivity index (using Eqs. 6 and 9) and capillary pressure resistivity index and the capillary pressure data are seen in Fig.
data (see Li and Horne1) respectively. The results are 15. One can see in Fig. 15 that the oil relative permeabilities
compared and shown in Fig. 3. inferred from the resistivity index data are almost equal to
Fig. 3 demonstrates that the relative permeability data those calculated from the capillary pressure data in the
inferred from the resistivity index data are close to those limestone core sample. The difference between the relative
calculated using capillary pressure data. The oil relative permeability inferred from the resistivity index and those
permeabilities inferred from resistivity index data are almost calculated from capillary pressure is acceptable in terms of
equal to those calculated from capillary pressure data. reservoir engineering applications.
Sanyal6 also conducted experimental measurements of
resistivity index and capillary pressure at different Conclusion
temperatures in the same core sample. The resistivity index Based on the present study, the following conclusions may be
data at a temperature of 300oF are plotted in Fig. 4. One can drawn in the cases studied:
see from Fig. 4 that the resistivity index data also follow 1. A semianalytical model was developed to infer relative
Archie’s law (Eq. 4). permeability from resistivity index data.
Fig. 5 shows the oil/water capillary pressure data measured 2. The values of the nonwetting phase relative permeability
simultaneously with resistivity in the same Berea sandstone inferred from the resistivity index data are almost equal to
core sample at a temperature of 300oF. those calculated from capillary pressure data.
Fig. 6 demonstrates the relative permeability data 3. For the wetting-phase relative permeability, the values
calculated from both the resistivity index data shown in Fig. 4 inferred from the resistivity index are close to those
(using Eqs. 6 and 9) and the capillary pressure data in Fig. 5 calculated from capillary pressure in most of the cases
(see Li and Horne1). studied.
One can see in Fig. 6 that both the oil and water relative
permeabilities inferred from the resistivity index data are Acknowledgments
almost equal to those calculated from the capillary pressure This research was conducted with financial support to the
data. Stanford Geothermal Program from the US Department of
Energy under grant DE-FG07-02ID14418, the contribution of
Boise Sandstone which is gratefully acknowledged.
The Boise sandstone core sample had a porosity of 32% and a
permeability of 960 md. The values of porosity and References
permeability are greater than those of the Berea sandstone 1. Li, K. and Horne, R.N.: “Experimental Verification of
used by Sanyal6. Figs. 7 and 8 show the resistivity index data Methods to Calculate Relative Permeability Using
and capillary pressure vs. water saturation in Boise sandstone Capillary Pressure Data,” SPE 76757, Proceedings of the
at a temperature of 175oF. 2002 SPE Western Region Meeting/AAPG Pacific
The relative permeability data calculated from both the Section Joint Meeting held in Anchorage, Alaska, May
resistivity index data shown in Fig. 7 (using Eqs. 6 and 9) and 20-22, 2002.
the capillary pressure data in Fig. 8 are plotted in Fig. 9. Fig. 2. Li, K.: “Generalized Capillary Pressure and Relative
9 shows that the oil and water relative permeabilities Permeability Model Inferred from Fractal
calculated from the resistivity index data are close to those Characterization of Porous Media,” SPE 89874, presented
calculated from the capillary pressure data. at the 2004 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
The results at a temperature of 300oF are demonstrated in Exhibition, Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 27 – 29 September
Figs. 10-12. Fig. 10 shows the resistivity data and Fig. 11 2004.
shows the capillary pressure data. Fig. 12 plots the relative 3. Archie, G.E.: “The electrical resistivity log as an aid in
permeability calculated from the resistivity index shown in determining some reservoir characteristics,” AIME
Fig. 10 (using Eqs. 6 and 9) and the capillary pressure in Fig. Petroleum Tech. (1942), 1-8.
11 respectively. Fig. 12 shows that the oil relative 4. Purcell, W.R.: "Capillary Pressures-Their Measurement
permeability values calculated from resistivity index are close Using Mercury and the Calculation of Permeability",
to those inferred from capillary pressure. However the water Trans. AIME, (1949), 186, 39.
relative permeability calculated from resistivity index data is 5. Brooks, R.H. and Corey, A.T.: “Hydraulic Properties of
smaller than those inferred from capillary pressure. Porous Media,” Colorado State University, Hydro paper
No.5 (1964).
Limestone 6. Sanyal, S.K.: The Effect of Temperature on Electrical
Resistivity and Capillary Pressure Behavior of Porous
The limestone core sample had a porosity of 19% and a Media, Ph.D. report, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.,
permeability of 410 md. 1972.
4 SPE 95575

1000 12

10
Resistivity Index

Capillary Pressure, psi

100 8

10 4

1 0
0.01 0.10 1.00 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Water Saturation, fraction Water Saturation, fraction

Figure 1: Relationship between resistivity index and water Figure 5: Capillary pressure data measured in Berea sandstone at
o 6 o 6
saturation in Berea sandstone at a temperature of 175 F (Sanyal ). a temperature of 300 F (Sanyal ).

1.0
20 krw from Resistivity
0.8

Relative Permeability
kro from Resistivity
krw from Pc
Capillary Pressure, psi

15 kro from Pc
0.6

10 0.4

0.2
5

0.0
0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Normalized Water Saturation, fraction
Water Saturation, fraction
Figure 6: Relative permeability calculated from resistivity and
Figure 2: Capillary pressure data measured in Berea sandstone at capillary pressure data in Berea sandstone at a temperature of
o 6 o
a temperature of 175 F (Sanyal ). 300 F.

1.0 1000

krw from Resistivity

0.8
Relative Permeability

kro from Resistivity

Resistivity Index

krw from Pc 100

0.6 kro from Pc

0.4
10

0.2

0.0 1
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.01 0.10 1.00
Normalized Water Saturation, fraction Water Saturation, fraction

Figure 3: Relative permeability calculated from resistivity and Figure 7: Relationship between resistivity index and water
o 6
capillary pressure data in Berea sandstone at a temperature of saturation in Boise sandstone at a temperature of 175 F (Sanyal ).
o
175 F.
20
1000
Capillary Pressure, psi

15
Resistivity Index

100
10

10 5

0
1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.01 0.10 1.00 Water Saturation, fraction
Water Saturation, fraction
Figure 4: Relationship between resistivity index and water Figure 8: Capillary pressure data measured in Boise sandstone at
o 6 o 6
saturation in Berea sandstone at a temperature of 300 F (Sanyal ). a temperature of 175 F (Sanyal ).
SPE 95575 5

1.0 1000
krw from Resistivity
0.8
Relative Permeability

kro from Resistivity

Resistivity Index
krw from Pc 100
0.6 kro from Pc

0.4
10
0.2

0.0 1
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.01 0.10 1.00
Normalized Water Saturation, fraction Water Saturation, fraction

Figure 9: Relative permeability calculated in Boise sandstone at a Figure 13: Resistivity index vs. water saturation in limestone at a
o o 6
temperature of 175 F. temperature of 300 F(Sanyal ).

1000 15

12

Capillary Pressure, psi

Resistivity Index

100
9

6
10
3

1 0
0.01 0.10 1.00 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Water Saturation, fraction Water Saturation, fraction

Figure 10: Resistivity index in Boise sandstone at a temperature Figure 14: Capillary pressure data measured in limestone at a
o 6 o 6
of 300 F (Sanyal ). temperature of 300 F (Sanyal ).

15 1.0
krw from Resistivity
12 0.8 kro from Resistivity
Relative Permeability
Capillary Pressure, psi

krw from Pc
kro from Pc
9 0.6

6 0.4

3 0.2

0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Water Saturation, fraction Normalized Water Saturation, fraction

Figure 11: Capillary pressure data measured in Boise sandstone Figure 15: Relative permeability calculated from resistivity and
o 6 o
at a temperature of 300 F (Sanyal ). capillary pressure data in limestone at a temperature of 300 F.

1.0
krw from Resistivity
0.8 kro from Resistivity
Relative Permeability

krw from Pc
kro from Pc
0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Normalized Water Saturation, fraction

Figure 12: Relative permeability calculated from resistivity and

o
capillary pressure in Boise sandstone at a temperature of 300 F.